4.4 Article

Serial Founder Effects During Range Expansion: A Spatial Analog of Genetic Drift

期刊

GENETICS
卷 191, 期 1, 页码 171-181

出版社

GENETICS SOCIETY AMERICA
DOI: 10.1534/genetics.112.139022

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. National Institutes of Health [R01-GM40282]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation grant [3100A0-126074]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Range expansions cause a series of founder events. We show that, in a one-dimensional habitat, these founder events are the spatial analog of genetic drift in a randomly mating population. The spatial series of allele frequencies created by successive founder events is equivalent to the time series of allele frequencies in a population of effective size k(e), the effective number of founders. We derive an expression for k(e) in a discrete-population model that allows for local population growth and migration among established populations. If there is selection, the net effect is determined approximately by the product of the selection coefficients and the number of generations between successive founding events. We use the model of a single population to compute analytically several quantities for an allele present in the source population: (i) the probability that it survives the series of colonization events, (ii) the probability that it reaches a specified threshold frequency in the last population, and (iii) the mean and variance of the frequencies in each population. We show that the analytic theory provides a good approximation to simulation results. A consequence of our approximation is that the average heterozygosity of neutral alleles decreases by a factor of 1 - 1/(2k(e)) in each new population. Therefore, the population genetic consequences of surfing can be predicted approximately by the effective number of founders and the effective selection coefficients, even in the presence of migration among populations. We also show that our analytic results are applicable to a model of range expansion in a continuously distributed population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据